<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.6082" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=759031317-20042011>Yes, and it was brought up that if the need can be
shared across multiple groups, then it is already more</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=759031317-20042011>of a "win" than if only one group gets access to
it.</SPAN></FONT></DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> arin-ppml-bounces@arin.net
[mailto:arin-ppml-bounces@arin.net] <B>On Behalf Of
</B>cja@daydream.com<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, April 20, 2011 9:09
AM<BR><B>To:</B> Martin Hannigan<BR><B>Cc:</B>
arin-ppml@arin.net<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-2011-5: Shared
Transition Space for IPv4 Address Extension - Last Call<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>I do think that there is a group of folks who need this.
Whether or not that need is more or less important than anyone else's
need is up to the community to decide. I just wanted to be clear that
this was already rejected two times in two different venues.
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Thanks!</DIV>
<DIV>----Cathy<BR><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Martin Hannigan <SPAN
dir=ltr><<A
href="mailto:hannigan@gmail.com">hannigan@gmail.com</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<DIV class=im>On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:44 AM, <A
href="mailto:cja@daydream.com">cja@daydream.com</A> <<A
href="mailto:packetgrrl@gmail.com">packetgrrl@gmail.com</A>>
wrote:<BR>> I too oppose this proposal. Let's be really clear
here. The more<BR>> appropriate venue is/was the IETF and the
IETF turned it down. It was also<BR>> brought up in the APNIC
region and that region also turned it down.<BR><BR><BR></DIV>Do you think
that they have need regardless of the non support for the
method?<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>